Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame certain parties of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
